FAA: 157 airspace violations since 9/11

Ron Natalie wrote:

I think Bush's rhetoric on Iraq has completely dulled our sense of what a
"weapon of mass destruction" is. Unless that suitcase has a nuke in it,
it's not "mass" destruction. It might be enough to blow up W sitting in
his living room, but that doesn't make it WMD.

Sorry...I wasn't clear.

Yes, I did mean precisely a suitcase with a nuclear device. Supposedly, the
old Soviet Union had these and Russia may have lost a few...again,
"supposedly". None of the sources (on either side!) appear overly
credible.

http://www.acronym.org.uk/dd/dd19/19nukes.htm
http://www.miis.edu/offsite_press/Time Magazine Oct 29, 2001.htm

But these look pretty heavy, so I've doubts that an ultralight can carry
them.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:

But these look pretty heavy, so I've doubts that an ultralight can carry
them.

You wouldn't have to go much beyond an ultralight. A few years ago, the Smithsonian
was doing some work in the Pacific. They mounted a 250 pound Imax camera on a
Quicksilver GT500 aircraft. Worked ok for a bit, but the pilot lost control of it
at altitude while trying to make a photo run with a cameraman on board. Put that
suitcase nuke in the passenger's seat, it would probably work fine.

The GT500 is classified as an ultralight under the European rules and as a Sport
Airplane under U.S. rules.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."